Froggy wrote:those people all make their livings on being sensationalists. The President should be held to a higher standard, no?

Absolutely.

Obama was actually correct and justified in his statement all the way up until he threw in the, "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon" comment. Before that comment, all he did was state that it was a tragedy and the truth needs to be discovered. Can't really argue with that logic. But, once he threw in the about "if I had a son...", he crossed a line and brought race into it which is inappropriate for his position.

Froggy wrote:those people all make their livings on being sensationalists. The President should be held to a higher standard, no?

Absolutely.

Obama was actually correct and justified in his statement all the way up until he threw in the, "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon" comment. Before that comment, all he did was state that it was a tragedy and the truth needs to be discovered. Can't really argue with that logic. But, once he threw in the about "if I had a son...", he crossed a line and brought race into it which is inappropriate for his position.

Mentioning the case at all was crossing the line, and the actions of his justice department with regards to the case was so far over the line he might be behind it again.

malkinshair wrote:Mark O'Mara (lead defense attorney) also said bluntly that, in his opinion, had GZ been black no charges would've been filed.

In my opinion, O'Mara's statement only prolongs and instigates the racial tension that surrounds this case. Charges should have been filed because someone died and the story of how it happened was beyond shady. If you take race out of the case, it's still a shady situation. In his position, O'Mara should attempt to diffuse the racial outcry rather than propagate it.

It was not beyond shady and never was shady. Charges were filed for political purposes. The case was a sham from start to finish.

topshelf wrote:Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with tonight's verdict, one thing everyone should agree on is that the "Stand Your Ground" law is horribly flawed. There is too much wiggle room, left far too open for interpretation, and the price is way too high.

It's been 2 and a half weeks and you didn't know stand your ground has no relevance in this trial???

But Nancy Grace said so.

One thing about Nancy Grace - after the Sandy Hook tragedy... she had a gun owner on - and she berated him with this line -"Sir do you know that an AR-15 WAS USED in this killing... LET ME STATE THAT AGAIN... AN A R.... AUTOMATIC RIFLE... A R."

Unfortunately the guest did not have a chance to talk - and thus correct Nancy on what the AR stands for in an AR 15.

tifosi77 wrote:And there is still an 80 or 90 second gap between when GZ end the 911 call and when neighbors call to report the fight. So where you question what the victim was doing for a period of time, I'm more interested in what the perpetrator was doing. In my eyes, every single second GZ spent out of his car following TM was a second that made his ability to claim self defense less credible. Because I don't have any problem at all believing that those seconds built up the notion (from TMs perspective) that he was being pursued with ill intent. And if I think someone is following me with ill intent, the last thing I want to do is show them where I live.

You can't say Zimmerman is stalking, but then ignore Martin's actions in not going home for a few minutes when he's literally 80 yards away and had a running head start. Nor can you ignore the testimony if Jeantel who says Trayvon told her he was at near his father's house. I would think if Martin was hiding or something, he wouldnt' still be talking on the phone to Jeantel giving away his hiding spot if Zimmerman was indeed hunting him down with a gun in hand to shoot him after calling the cops to show up (what an ingenious idea) If Martin does indeed go back to find Zimmerman - which I think it's pretty obvious he did given the timeline - then at the very least both are at fault at which point the guy who threw the punch (Martin) and continues to throw punches according to the witnesses, pretty much makes the case open/shut in terms of self defense. This case was really as simple as the Jury's short decision implies.

Anyone looking into it for more that has some kind of political interest in it in my opinion.

Last edited by DropEmJayBird on Sun Jul 14, 2013 11:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

He didn't have a gun on him. I don't see how it could have been possible.

DropEmJayBird wrote:You can't say Zimmerman is stalking, but then ignore Martin's actions in not going home for a few minutes when he's literally 80 yards away and had a running head start. Nor can you ignore the testimony if Jeantel who says Trayvon told her he was at near his father's house. I would think if Martin was hiding or something, he wouldnt' still be talking on the phone to Jeantel giving away his hiding spot if Zimmerman was indeed hunting him down with a gun in hand to shoot him after calling the cops to show up (what an ingenious idea) If Martin does indeed go back to find Zimmerman - which I think it's pretty obvious he did given the timeline - then at the very least both are at fault at which point the guy who threw the punch (Martin) and continues to throw punches according to the witnesses, pretty much makes the case open/shut in terms of self defense. This case was really as simple as the Jury's short decision implies.

Anyone looking into it for more that has some kind of political interest in it in my opinion.

There is no question that they both were at fault for various parts of what happened that night, but everything else in your post is based off of the same political interest that you are accusing others of, no? You're speculating on whether or not Trayvon was hiding, that he went back towards Zimmerman, and that Martin threw the first punch. There is no definitive proof that any of that either happened or didn't happen, so we can't definitively state that it either did or didn't, right? If you are open to the idea that Martin threw the first punch, then you also have to be open to the idea that he didn't, because, as you put it, anything else would be "political interest". It is just a plausible that Martin jumped Zimmerman as it is Zimmerman jumped Martin and Martin simple beat his a**.

DropEmJayBird wrote:And besides - nobody would even know about the case because black on hispanic crime is no biggie.

You should clarify with "no biggie to the media". I have no problems with Trayvon's parents wanting a legal investigation... I'd be more concerned if they didn't. I believe every parent would want the death of their kid looked into. You can blame the media and the "sensationalists" that were mentioned earlier for the fact that the whole thing turned into a circus.

I, for one, am eminently thankful we have a reasonable doubt standard in US criminal law. Don't blame the jury, as many morons have done. There was not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman beyond a reasonable doubt on either count. That's not opinion, it's fact.

I, for one, am eminently thankful we have a reasonable doubt standard in US criminal law. Don't blame the jury, as many morons have done. There was not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman beyond a reasonable doubt on either count. That's not opinion, it's fact.

I didn't read all 45 pages of this thread, so I guess instead of repeating things that probably have been discussed already, I'll just stay out of it.

I have a friend who was close friends with Ron Goldman and knew Nicole Brown Simpson (they were neighbors and he says she actually babysat him once). Ordinarily his Facebook posts are claptrap about the 2d Amendment and government conspiracies and taxes. This morning he wrote about testifying three times in the OJ case, and sitting across the room from the man who he felt murdered one of his best friends. The rage that he felt was palpable. But he added "When OJ was found innocent in the criminal trial I did not march down the street in protest. I understood why the jurors had made their decision, I did not agree, but I understood and respected it, as I did the civil court decision."

That's pretty much how I feel about this (minus the personal animus, of course). As I looked at the evidence, I didn't find GZs story very credible, nor did I believe his actions to be entirely pure of heart. So you have a man who admits to taking another human life in questionable circumstances suffering no legal consequence of that action. But I understand how reasonable people would come to a different conclusion and believe his story and find him not criminally liable. So I disagree with the verdict, but that sometimes happens. Our justice system isn't perfect, but I'll take it over pretty much any other one on offer.

The foregoing registers as completely bonkers now that I'm reading the story from last year about the woman in FL who had never been in any sort of legal trouble in her life, who fired warning shots at her (allegedly abusive) husband, against whom she had already obtained a protective order.... and was sentenced to the man min 20 years in jail for attempted murder with a firearm. For not killing anyone.

malkinshair wrote:Mark O'Mara (lead defense attorney) also said bluntly that, in his opinion, had GZ been black no charges would've been filed.

tifosi77 wrote:And there is still an 80 or 90 second gap between when GZ end the 911 call and when neighbors call to report the fight. So where you question what the victim was doing for a period of time, I'm more interested in what the perpetrator was doing. In my eyes, every single second GZ spent out of his car following TM was a second that made his ability to claim self defense less credible. Because I don't have any problem at all believing that those seconds built up the notion (from TMs perspective) that he was being pursued with ill intent. And if I think someone is following me with ill intent, the last thing I want to do is show them where I live.

You can't say Zimmerman is stalking, but then ignore Martin's actions in not going home for a few minutes when he's literally 80 yards away and had a running head start. Nor can you ignore the testimony if Jeantel who says Trayvon told her he was at near his father's house. I would think if Martin was hiding or something, he wouldnt' still be talking on the phone to Jeantel giving away his hiding spot if Zimmerman was indeed hunting him down with a gun in hand to shoot him after calling the cops to show up (what an ingenious idea) If Martin does indeed go back to find Zimmerman - which I think it's pretty obvious he did given the timeline - then at the very least both are at fault at which point the guy who threw the punch (Martin) and continues to throw punches according to the witnesses, pretty much makes the case open/shut in terms of self defense. This case was really as simple as the Jury's short decision implies.

I'm not ignoring anything. In fact, I've addressed that point directly three or four times in the past couple days.

If I believe someone is following me, and I'm suspicious of their intent, I'm not entirely certain the best course of action would be showing that person where I lived.

i think people who are juxtaposing themselves as martin under the premise of, "it could happen to anyone" need to re-evaluate how they deal with confrontation. maybe all the caveman has made its way out of my genes, but escalating that situation into violence is something i would never see myself doing - and i hope that's true for most people. so while zimmerman is a poor excuse for a human, and what happened to martin was awful and far more than he deserved, if i had to pick one practical takeaway from this, it's don't engage in violence - even if you're being harassed in an extreme way. once you go down that path, you lose far too much control.

tifosi77 wrote:That's pretty much how I feel about this (minus the personal animus, of course). As I looked at the evidence, I didn't find GZs story very credible, nor did I believe his actions to be entirely pure of heart. So you have a man who admits to taking another human life in questionable circumstances suffering no legal consequence of that action. But I understand how reasonable people would come to a different conclusion and believe his story and find him not criminally liable. So I disagree with the verdict, but that sometimes happens. Our justice system isn't perfect, but I'll take it over pretty much any other one on offer.

Agreed. I don't believe that George Zimmerman was simply following Martin, I believe (based on his "F****** punks! Those a**** always get away!" exclamation) that he was irate and, in his mind, already (mis)labeled Trayvon Martin as "up to no good". On the flip side, I don't believe that Trayvon Martin was the innocent victim in the altercation, I believe that, at some point, he decided to engage with Zimmerman. Ultimately, both parties chose poorly, but if Zimmerman listens to what he was told ("stand down"), none of us would ever know either one of these individual's names.

But, it is what it is. Given the stories and the evidence, the jury did what they had to do. Again, that is my problem with "Stand Your Ground", there is too much room for interpretation and you can only get the side of the story from the person who pulled the trigger (in a case with no witnesses).

shmenguin wrote:i think people who are juxtaposing themselves as martin under the premise of, "it could happen to anyone" need to re-evaluate how they deal with confrontation. maybe all the caveman has made its way out of my genes, but escalating that situation into violence is something i would never see myself doing - and i hope that's true for most people. so while zimmerman is a poor excuse for a human, and what happened to martin was awful and far more than he deserved, if i had to pick one practical takeaway from this, it's don't engage in violence - even if you're being harassed in an extreme way. once you go down that path, you lose far too much control.

Totally agree. I'm like you in that I would have either gone home or called the cops myself. When you lower yourself to the irrational, you become equally as irrational.

I also would have never grabbed a gun and followed someone through my neighborhood, either.